Why lock Multipliers?

[LifeStealer]

Why is it that AMD and Intel lock multipliers? I mean I understand it protects them from people who try to overclock, fry the chip and try to RMA it but... If I buy a chip to o/c I buy an OEM because I'm going to be buying a higher grade heatsink anyway so why lock those multipliers if they don't even carry a warrenty?

It just seems to me like if I buy it, I can break it... I'm probably missing something though.

 

[BW86]

you said it yourself "I mean I understand it protects them from people who try to overclock"

 

[LifeStealer]

But what about OEMs? They know where those are going. Or is it just to much of a hassle to unlock some while not unlocking others?

 

[nitromullet]

Another argument put forth is that locking prevents mom and pop shops from overclocking cheaper processors and reselling them as higher clocked ones to end users. Locking the multipliers allows the chipmakers to control how many of their high end parts reach the market, which in turn allows them to set the price. This is why the FX series from AMD come unlocked. They are considered an enthusiast part and carry a high price. It's not possible to raise the clockspeed on an FX proc and sell it for a profit because the cost of the proc is so high to begin with. It is doubful that you will ever see FX procs drop in price, they will disappear from shelves before the become cheap.

This actually brings me to a question... The socket 940 FX proc was simply an Opteron, rebadged as an Athlon64, are the Opterons unlocked? Could one get say an Opteron 146, which is around $300 and overclock it to a 148, which is the equivalent of the FX 51 and runs about $125 more?

 

[MDE]

Originally posted by: LifeStealer
But what about OEMs? They know where those are going. Or is it just to much of a hassle to unlock some while not unlocking others?

Because some unscrupulous OEMs would just jack up the multiplier and sell a 3000+ as a 3200+.

 

[AnnoyedGrunt]

opterons have a locked multiplier, but you could still overclock by raising the FSB. Not sure if any 940 boards have PCI/AGP lock though, so it's probably not a very good option.

-D'oh!

 

[LifeStealer]

Why then doesn't AMD sell certain retailers unlocked multipliers? It would nurture the bond between enthusiast and AMD. For a long while we were the people keeping AMD going. Give us our props

 

[Mik3y]

cpu's are multiplier locked because if they werent, amd and intel would be losing a LOT of money to overclockers. why buy an athlon 64 3800+ when you can change a 3000+ to it? the barton 2500+ and the barton 3200+ are the exact same cpu's. the only difference is that the 3200+'s fsb is set to 200 instead of 166. in this case, amd can mass produce the same cpu's and clock them at certain speeds so that they have cpu's varying in different speeds and prices.

 

[AutoPilotOff]

aren't people who build there own computers and O/C in the minority compared to people who goto Dell or best buy or something like that and buy a prebuilt system? 99% of people don't know what a multiplier is let alone how to change it.

 

[MDE]

Originally posted by: AutoPilot
aren't people who build there own computers and O/C in the minority compared to people who goto Dell or best buy or something like that and buy a prebuilt system? 99% of people don't know what a multiplier is let alone how to change it.

Exactly, why should they cater to such a small audience and leave themselves open to public ridicule when some asshat relabels a 2800+ a 3200+ and it isn't stable? That's not the way to shed the image of Intel being "more stable."

 

[Wingznut]

As MDE said, it's the remarkers that AMD and Intel are concerned about... Not the enthusiast.

Back in the day of the original Pentium, it was discovered that a ton of chips were being remarked and sold in systems. Of course when they started failing, the chip manufacturer took the heat.

 

[klah]

http://news.com.com/Intel+file...1615.html?tag=mainstry

 

[LifeStealer]

Those were the days...

 

[fanboi]

Man, $300 bucks for a P2 300 mHz...

If you take inflation into account, that's close to $360 nowadays...

 

[cbehnken]

What I don't buy about that arguement is the fact that nearly all computer BIOSs and even Windows XP will identify the processor as what it's model is, regardless of clock speed.

My A64 shows 2800+ at 2.2 Ghz in my computer properties and on the bios screen at bootup.

It is very easy to know if you've bought an o/c chip.

AMD/Intel know that people who change their FSB in order to o/c are a small minority of people. But, if all you had to do was enter your bios and select 3000+ instead of 2800+ (changing the multiplier) they would surely lose sales for their upper end processors.

 

[Wingznut]

Originally posted by: cbehnken
What I don't buy about that arguement is the fact that nearly all computer BIOSs and even Windows XP will identify the processor as what it's model is, regardless of clock speed.

My A64 shows 2800+ at 2.2 Ghz in my computer properties and on the bios screen at bootup.

It is very easy to know if you've bought an o/c chip.

AMD/Intel know that people who change their FSB in order to o/c are a small minority of people. But, if all you had to do was enter your bios and select 3000+ instead of 2800+ (changing the multiplier) they would surely lose sales for their upper end processors.

The majority of people haven't a clue (nor a will) to look into the BIOS.

Also, keep in mind that locking the multiplier came long before WinXP. I doubt either AMD or Intel sees a point in going back.

 

[cbehnken]

You don't have to look in the BIOS, it pops up as soon as your computer comes posts.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: cbehnken
You don't have to look in the BIOS, it pops up as soon as your computer comes posts.

Most BIOSes don't identify the cpu that way(IME). They, in the case of AMD rated cpus, do post a Model#, but it is in relation to the mhz being used and not some ID code on the chip. Bump the FSB down from default on an Athlon and suddenly the Model# will lower to reflect the new speed.